Abstract The Swedish railway has during many years received low customer satisfaction scores. Reasons for this are reliability, service and information concerns. The focus of this master thesis lies on the railway platform. The platform is an important part to the factors above as its information and facilities, which constitute a part of the service before the trip, could contribute in causing delays and reliability issues. This study investigates the behaviour of passengers on railway platforms and the effect that information, seats and entrances along the platform has on that behaviour. The goal is to find advantages and disadvantages and propose improvements in a Swedish setting. Platforms and trains that have been studied are in Stockholm, Sweden and Tokyo, Japan. Platform distributions and individual behaviour on the platforms are recorded with three different and relatively easy methods. Results of the Swedish study show aggregate trends where passengers tend to cluster around entrances and seats. Many Swedish passengers do not believe themselves to have enough information to know where their car will stop. These passengers do mostly not know that information exist and on average stand much further away from their closest door, when the train arrives, compared to passengers that believe themselves to know where their car will stop along the platform. The results of the Japanese study show that almost all passengers stand close to their door. From the findings in not only this, but also other studies, four aggregate properties in order to get better railway platforms are finally presented. These properties are reliability, clarity and availability of information and good location of seats and other facilities. Suggestions for tangible improvements for the Swedish railway platforms are finally given. Among these improvements are new information screens and standardized information and stopping position of trains.

This study attempted to establish the travel behaviours and choice criteria of the South African domestic air passenger and how they differed between low-cost carriers (LCCs) and full-service carriers (FSCs). The study was quantitative and used structured questionnaires to collect data via personal interviews. Descriptive and inferential techniques were used to analyse the data, including a binomial logistic regression to identify predictors of model choice. Analysis This study attempted to establish the travel behaviours and choice criteria of the South African domestic air passenger and how they differed between low-cost carriers (LCCs) and full-service carriers (FSCs). The study was quantitative and used structured questionnaires to collect data via personal interviews. Descriptive and inferential techniques were used to analyse the data, including a binomial logistic regression to identify predictors of model choice. Analysis showed that passengers had a limited understanding of the functioning of the models. This results in consumer perceptions and expectations being discordant with the true differences. In distinguishing between models, LCC passengers rate LCCs more favourably than FSC passengers, but both rate FSCs higher than LCCs. This shows the need of consumers to have the features and services of the FSCs. Amongst the key findings was the absolute importance of price to the passengers on both models when purchasing the ticket. The analysis showed that LCC passengers are highly price sensitive and show loyalty to the lowest price (not airline model). It was apparent that frequent flyer programmes (FFP), or linkages to 3rd party loyalty programmes, for LCCs need to be reconsidered. Younger LCC passengers especially, indicated a need for a simple FFP to receive some form of ‘reward’, as well as benefits traditionally only offered by FSCs. FSC passengers show a greater degree of loyalty and less fare sensitivity. This provides the FSCs with a degree of fare flexibility and the opportunity to move their loyal, less price-sensitive consumers up the price curve to maximise revenue. It was shown that, in distinguishing themselves from FSCs, it is important that LCCs are perceived as being more affordable than FSCs and are offering a value-for-money service. In essence, LCCs have to defend their positioning by (i) ensuring that their fares are not perceived to be as high as a FSCs and (ii) watching that the FSC fares are not declining to a level where FSCs are perceived as being as cheap as a LCC. For LCCs, brand building strategies around issues other than fare need to be devised, with attention paid to identifying determinant factors. / Business Management / D. Com (Business Management)